New Horizons in Insect Science Towards Sustainable Pest Management

Area-Wide Integrated Pest Management in Pigeonpea 385

to 0.41 larvae/plant in IPM and from 0.01 to 0.58
larvae/plant in non-IPM fields. Overall, the pop-
ulation was minimal in IPM fields (0.16/plant)
as compared to non-IPM fields (0.25/plant).
The maximum population was recorded in 47th
MW (15–21 November 10) in IPM and non-IPM
fields (Table 1 ).

Incidence of Spotted Pod Borer

The number of webbings on plant due to larvae
of spotted pod borer was minimal in all IPM
fields (0.08/plant) compared to that of non-IPM
(0.19/plant). The peak incidence was recorded in
52nd MW (20–26 December 10) in both IPM and
non-IPM fields (Table 1 ).

Pod Damage Due to Pod Borer Complex

The percentage of pod damage was less in
IPM (7.71 %) as compared to non-IPM fields
(21.52 %). The pod damage was observed from
48th MW (22–28 November 10), and thereafter
increased till the end of season (Table 2 ). The
highest pod damage was noticed in 52nd MW
(20–26 December 10).

Immature Stages of Pod Fly

The immature stages (maggot and pupa) of pod
fly in pods of pigeonpea were noticed in 50th

MW (6–12 December 10). The range was from

0.66 to 5.66 immature stages/50 pods in IPM,

and from 4.33 to 17.66 immature stages/50 pods

in non-IPM fields. The immature stages records

increased till the end of season. The average of

the immature stages was 2.14 and 7.99/50 pods

in IPM and non-IPM, respectively.

Grain Damage due to Pod Fly

At harvest, the observations on grain damage due

to pod fly indicated that the grain damage in IPM

was 5.74 % whereas it was 12.20 % in non-IPM

fields.

Status of Natural Enemies on Pigeonpea

in IPM and Non-IPM

Predators

The population of natural enemies like coccinel-

lids (0.21 in IPM and 0.09/plant in non-IPM),

chrysopids (0.03 in IPM and 0.01/plant in non-

IPM) and spiders (0.36 in IPM and 0.24/plant

in non-IPM) was more in IPM fields. The coc-

cinellid population was 0.03–1.01/plant in IPM,

and 0.01–0.41/plant in non-IPM (Table 3 ). The

chysopids population was 0.02–0.10/plant in

IPM and 0.01–0.04/plant in non-IPM.

MW Duration No. of Helicov-

erpa armigera

larvae/plant

No. of Exelastis

atomosa larvae/

plant

No. of webbings

by Maruca vitrata

larvae/plant

IPM Non-IPM IPM Non-IPM IPM Non-IPM

43 18−24 October10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

44 25−31 October10 0.03 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08

45 01−07 Novober10 0.46 0.60 0.11 0.21 0.13 0.30

46 08−14 Novober10 0.55 0.79 0.08 0.18 0.06 0.16

47 15−21 Novober10 0.62 0.83 0.41 0.58 0.11 0.19

48 22−28 Novober10 0.76 0.88 0.20 0.30 0.10 0.20

49 29 Novober10−05

December 10

0.58 0.73 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.16

50 06−12 December10 0.53 0.70 0.11 0.35 0.00 0.15

51 13−19 December10 0.36 0.76 0.40 0.45 0.20 0.35

52 20−26 December10 0.25 0.83 0.25 0.33 0.26 0.41

1 27 December10−02

January 11

0.15 0.85 0.20 0.31 0.01 0.05

Mean 0.39 0.64 0.16 0.25 0.08 0.19

Table 1 Incidence of pod
borers on pigeonpea in
IPM and non-IPM fields